In a suit for specific performance, where time is expressly made the essence of a contract, the purchaser's failure to perform within the stipulated period, combined with a lack of proven readiness and willingness to fulfill financial obligations, precludes the grant of discretionary specific performance relief.

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.10.2013 PASSED IN O.S.NO.297/2008 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 22.04.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

I. PREFACE:

The present regular first appeal has been filed by the appellant/defendant under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the CPC') impugning the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2013 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Ramanagara, in O.S.No.297/2008 instituted by the plaintiffs/ respondents herein seeking specific performance of the Agreement of Sale dated 17.09.2005, in respect of the suit schedule properties, by receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs.50,41,875/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Forty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Five Only).

2. Parties are referred to as per the ranking before the Trial Court for the sake of convenience.

II. FACTS OF THE CASE:

3. The case of the plaintiffs before the trial Court in sum and substance was that the appellant/defendant was the owner and possessor of agricultural lands situated at Nidagal, Aralalsandra Village, Kasaba Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, formerly Bangalore Rural District, presently Ramanagara District, totally ad measuring 34 acres 21 guntas comprised of nine survey numbers (herein after referred to as 'the suit schedule properties'). The defendant having got absolute saleable right over the suit schedule properties, offered to sell the suit schedule properties in favour of plaintiffs and the plaintiffs after verifying the documents agreed to purchase the suit schedule properties for consideration of a sum of Rs.60,41,875/-. On 17.09.2005, plaintiffs and the defendant entered into registered Agreement of Sale (Ex.P2) and on the date of the agreement, the defendant received a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) as advance amount and balance sale consideration of Rs.50,41,875/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Forty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Five Only) was to be paid at the time of execution of the registered sale deed in favour of the defendant i.e. on or before 15.11.2005.

4. The defendant was residing in Mumbai, whereas the properties were situated in Kanakapura Taluk. The defendant was required to get the suit schedule properties measured through Taluk surveyor and survey sketch prepared, to be submitted before the Sub Registrar for registration of the sale deed. The survey sketch was mandatory requirement as per the Government of Karnataka Circular bearing No.76/2001-2002 dated 10.01.2005. The defendant after execution of Ex.P2 went back to Mumbai and never turned up to contact the plaintiffs to measure the suit schedule properties and also to prepare the survey sketch. Portion of the suit schedule properties was being encroached by the neighbours. Though it was mentio